4 ms·

This looks a lot like evolution in real time.

thenoblesunfish 5y ago
Your comment could be read two in ways: 1) People refusing to get vaccinations are more likely to die, which will affect the human gene pool. 2) The coronavirus itself is going to evolve faster (creating new variants) because of more replication in the unvaccinated human population. I'd be cautious about the first one - we have a long history of getting things wrong in this area. The second one is pretty undeniable (this is how we got the Delta Variant, I think), and it makes the (often reasonable) "their bodies, their choice" argument harder.
- minikites 5y ago
  >it makes the (often reasonable) "their bodies, their choice" argument harder. This argument is in no way reasonable when talking about a contagious disease. It's not about your body, it's about society. They steadfastly believe they don't owe anything to society, whether it's getting a vaccine or wearing a mask.
  - effie 5y ago
    Compulsory wearing a mask may be a good idea in some parts of space-time (a bus, a train, an airplane), not in others (outside). It's like going around naked on the street is a no-no, but on a dedicated beach it may be OK. "My body my choice" argument does not work here. Compulsory getting a government-sanctioned liquid into my body is a completely different topic. "My body my choice" exactly. My part of space-time. Also contagious disease does not mean threat to society. It's a weak disease for most people, something like 98% of people who get sick, get through.
    - minikites 5y ago
      >Compulsory getting a government-sanctioned liquid into my body is a completely different topic. "My body my choice" exactly. My part of space-time. But you can't "choose" to be separate from society, that's my point. The people in question want to refuse vaccination but still participate fully in society, which is not how a societal contract works. If the consequences for not getting vaccinated had more impact on an individual's participation in society, I think we'd see fewer people "choosing" to not get vaccinated, because they would actually face consequences for that choice. Instead, people are able to refuse the vaccine, still participate fully in society, and the consequences are fully externalized onto those who are unable to be vaccinated.
      - effie 5y ago
        > But you can't "choose" to be separate from society, that's my point. Of course you can, to varying degrees. The farther from cities and the more resourceful you are, the more separate you can get. > The people in question want to refuse vaccination but still participate fully in society, which is not how a societal contract works. You only wish there was such a contract, but there is no such thing. Even in cities, being part of a free society does not mean or require submitting to any medical procedure. > the consequences are fully externalized onto those who are unable to be vaccinated. Not getting vaccinated does not imply, legally or physically, that you intentionally spread disease. You are jumping to false conclusions.
        minikites 5y ago
        >Of course you can, to varying degrees. The farther from cities and the more resourceful you are, the more separate you can get. Separating yourself physically from other people doesn't make you any less of a member of society, you're just lengthening the umbilical cord. >Not getting vaccinated does not imply, legally or physically, that you intentionally spread disease. You are jumping to false conclusions. It does imply that through negligence: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negligence#Elements_of_negligence_claims https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negligence#Elements_of_neglige... We have a duty to other people and other people getting sick through the inaction of an individual's refusal to get vaccinated is an easily foreseeable outcome.
        effie 5y ago
        > We have a duty to other people and other people getting sick through the inaction of an individual's refusal to get vaccinated is an easily foreseeable outcome. No that's pure fantasy, most people in most situations do not have such a duty. If you're an adult, you yourself are responsible for your health, not people out there who you encounter in your life. They have to obey the laws, but they don't have to respect your medical wishes to protect some group. And even those that do have duty of care, like doctors and nurses to their patients, have other options to fulfill it: by having antibodies; by having cell immunity; by maintaining profylactic medications such as zinc, vitamin D, ivermectine; by getting tested often; by limiting their exposure to the patient. Vaccination isn't the only way to fulfill that duty of care.
melenaboija 5y ago
Is not evolution always in real time?
- effie 5y ago
  While this is a process that is believed to be happening, it is very hard to observe in real time. It takes comparing data between decades and more to notice changes in composition of animal bodies.
MagnumOpus 5y ago
No, almost all people who die unvaxxed are past reproductive age. For evolutionary fitness, it doesn't matter if you die a dumbass at 55 as long as you spawned loads of offspring beforehand.

Your comment could be read two in ways: 1) People refusing to get vaccinations are more likely to die, which will affect the human gene pool. 2) The coronavirus itself is going to evolve faster (creating new variants) because of more replication in the unvaccinated human population. I'd be cautious about the first one - we have a long history of getting things wrong in this area. The second one is pretty undeniable (this is how we got the Delta Variant, I think), and it makes the (often reasonable) "their bodies, their choice" argument harder.

minikites 5y ago
>it makes the (often reasonable) "their bodies, their choice" argument harder. This argument is in no way reasonable when talking about a contagious disease. It's not about your body, it's about society. They steadfastly believe they don't owe anything to society, whether it's getting a vaccine or wearing a mask.
- effie 5y ago
  Compulsory wearing a mask may be a good idea in some parts of space-time (a bus, a train, an airplane), not in others (outside). It's like going around naked on the street is a no-no, but on a dedicated beach it may be OK. "My body my choice" argument does not work here. Compulsory getting a government-sanctioned liquid into my body is a completely different topic. "My body my choice" exactly. My part of space-time. Also contagious disease does not mean threat to society. It's a weak disease for most people, something like 98% of people who get sick, get through.
  - minikites 5y ago
    >Compulsory getting a government-sanctioned liquid into my body is a completely different topic. "My body my choice" exactly. My part of space-time. But you can't "choose" to be separate from society, that's my point. The people in question want to refuse vaccination but still participate fully in society, which is not how a societal contract works. If the consequences for not getting vaccinated had more impact on an individual's participation in society, I think we'd see fewer people "choosing" to not get vaccinated, because they would actually face consequences for that choice. Instead, people are able to refuse the vaccine, still participate fully in society, and the consequences are fully externalized onto those who are unable to be vaccinated.
    - effie 5y ago
      > But you can't "choose" to be separate from society, that's my point. Of course you can, to varying degrees. The farther from cities and the more resourceful you are, the more separate you can get. > The people in question want to refuse vaccination but still participate fully in society, which is not how a societal contract works. You only wish there was such a contract, but there is no such thing. Even in cities, being part of a free society does not mean or require submitting to any medical procedure. > the consequences are fully externalized onto those who are unable to be vaccinated. Not getting vaccinated does not imply, legally or physically, that you intentionally spread disease. You are jumping to false conclusions.
      - minikites 5y ago
        >Of course you can, to varying degrees. The farther from cities and the more resourceful you are, the more separate you can get. Separating yourself physically from other people doesn't make you any less of a member of society, you're just lengthening the umbilical cord. >Not getting vaccinated does not imply, legally or physically, that you intentionally spread disease. You are jumping to false conclusions. It does imply that through negligence: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negligence#Elements_of_negligence_claims https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negligence#Elements_of_neglige... We have a duty to other people and other people getting sick through the inaction of an individual's refusal to get vaccinated is an easily foreseeable outcome.
        effie 5y ago
        > We have a duty to other people and other people getting sick through the inaction of an individual's refusal to get vaccinated is an easily foreseeable outcome. No that's pure fantasy, most people in most situations do not have such a duty. If you're an adult, you yourself are responsible for your health, not people out there who you encounter in your life. They have to obey the laws, but they don't have to respect your medical wishes to protect some group. And even those that do have duty of care, like doctors and nurses to their patients, have other options to fulfill it: by having antibodies; by having cell immunity; by maintaining profylactic medications such as zinc, vitamin D, ivermectine; by getting tested often; by limiting their exposure to the patient. Vaccination isn't the only way to fulfill that duty of care.

melenaboija 5y ago

Is not evolution always in real time?

effie 5y ago
While this is a process that is believed to be happening, it is very hard to observe in real time. It takes comparing data between decades and more to notice changes in composition of animal bodies.

MagnumOpus 5y ago

No, almost all people who die unvaxxed are past reproductive age. For evolutionary fitness, it doesn't matter if you die a dumbass at 55 as long as you spawned loads of offspring beforehand.